Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation

Serum thymus and activation regulated chemokine (TARC) levels reflect classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) disease activity and correspond with treatment response. We compared mid‐treatment interim TARC (iTARC) with interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography (iPET) imaging to predict...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Plattel, Wouter J., Visser, Lydia, Diepstra, Arjan, Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M., Nijland, Marcel, van Meerten, Tom, Kluin‐Nelemans, Hanneke C., van Imhoff, Gustaaf W., van den Berg, Anke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Haematological Malignancy ‐ Clinical
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32106342
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjh.16514
_version_ 1783563495749451776
author Plattel, Wouter J.
Visser, Lydia
Diepstra, Arjan
Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M.
Nijland, Marcel
van Meerten, Tom
Kluin‐Nelemans, Hanneke C.
van Imhoff, Gustaaf W.
van den Berg, Anke
author_facet Plattel, Wouter J.
Visser, Lydia
Diepstra, Arjan
Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M.
Nijland, Marcel
van Meerten, Tom
Kluin‐Nelemans, Hanneke C.
van Imhoff, Gustaaf W.
van den Berg, Anke
author_sort Plattel, Wouter J.
collection PubMed
description Serum thymus and activation regulated chemokine (TARC) levels reflect classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) disease activity and correspond with treatment response. We compared mid‐treatment interim TARC (iTARC) with interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography (iPET) imaging to predict modified progression‐free survival (mPFS) in a group of 95 patients with cHL. High iTARC levels were found in nine and positive iPET in 17 patients. The positive predictive value (PPV) of iTARC for a 5‐year mPFS event was 88% compared to 47% for iPET. The negative predictive value was comparable at 86% for iTARC and 85% for iPET. Serum iTARC levels more accurately reflect treatment response with a higher PPV compared to iPET.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7383815
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73838152020-07-27 Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation Plattel, Wouter J. Visser, Lydia Diepstra, Arjan Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M. Nijland, Marcel van Meerten, Tom Kluin‐Nelemans, Hanneke C. van Imhoff, Gustaaf W. van den Berg, Anke Br J Haematol Haematological Malignancy ‐ Clinical Serum thymus and activation regulated chemokine (TARC) levels reflect classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) disease activity and correspond with treatment response. We compared mid‐treatment interim TARC (iTARC) with interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography (iPET) imaging to predict modified progression‐free survival (mPFS) in a group of 95 patients with cHL. High iTARC levels were found in nine and positive iPET in 17 patients. The positive predictive value (PPV) of iTARC for a 5‐year mPFS event was 88% compared to 47% for iPET. The negative predictive value was comparable at 86% for iTARC and 85% for iPET. Serum iTARC levels more accurately reflect treatment response with a higher PPV compared to iPET. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-02-27 2020-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7383815/ /pubmed/32106342 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjh.16514 Text en © 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Haematological Malignancy ‐ Clinical
Plattel, Wouter J.
Visser, Lydia
Diepstra, Arjan
Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M.
Nijland, Marcel
van Meerten, Tom
Kluin‐Nelemans, Hanneke C.
van Imhoff, Gustaaf W.
van den Berg, Anke
Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
title Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
title_full Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
title_fullStr Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
title_short Interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)F‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical Hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
title_sort interim thymus and activation regulated chemokine versus interim (18)f‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography in classical hodgkin lymphoma response evaluation
topic Haematological Malignancy ‐ Clinical
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32106342
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjh.16514
work_keys_str_mv AT plattelwouterj interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT visserlydia interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT diepstraarjan interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT glaudemansandorwjm interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT nijlandmarcel interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT vanmeertentom interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT kluinnelemanshannekec interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT vanimhoffgustaafw interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation
AT vandenberganke interimthymusandactivationregulatedchemokineversusinterim18ffluorodeoxyglucosepositronemissiontomographyinclassicalhodgkinlymphomaresponseevaluation

Ejemplares similares